For immediate releaseOct. 7, 2008

EDITOR’S NOTE

: These stories are produced by University of Montana journalism students under the supervision of Professor Dennis Swibold.They may be used without charge, provided editors retain the students’ bylines. Please contact Professor Swibold(www.dennis.swibold@umontana.edu) with any questions. You can also findthis story and other information on the upcoming election atwww.montanaschoice2008.blogspot.com.)

By LAURA BARNESCommunity News ServiceUM School of Journalism

Since 1948 the six-mill levy has been a financial staple for Montana’suniversities and colleges. On Nov. 4, Montana voters will decide whether tokeep it that way.The $13 million raised by this special property tax is distributed to 11campuses across Montana. It represents a fraction of the Montana UniversitySystem’s budget, but it is crucial nonetheless, officials say.The money helps support everything from student services, facultysalaries and libraries to utilities and classroom equipment, said SheilaStearns, the state’s commissioner of higher education.Should it fail, the Board of Regents, which governs the universitysystem, will face tough choices, she added.“"Without it,” she said, “the Board of Regents would have a big hole tofill through program cuts, increased tuition, increased legislative funding, or a combination of those three."Regents Chairman Steve Barrett echoed Stearns’ fears."Defeated, it almost certainly guarantees a tuition increase," he said.The levy, which is put on the ballot every 10 years, has never failed.Higher ed officials view that record as a demonstration of the public’s faithin the system’s governance. But that’s not a faith everyone shares.Of the Legislature’s 150 members, only 17 voted against the bill that putit on the ballot. That minority includes Rep. John Sinrud, chairman of theHouse’s powerful Appropriations Committee, a Bozeman-area Republican.Sinrud said he voted against the levy is because lawmakers don’t havesufficient oversight of the university system spending. Under the state’s

Constitution, the regents alone have the power to govern the system andspend the money it gets from tuition, taxes and other sources."As legislators it is our job to look after the tax dollar," he said.For example, Sinrud cited a 2006 controversy over the University of Montana’s handling of a federal grant from NASA. Some of the money wentto create an educational program called the Inland Northwest SpaceAlliance, which investigators later determined had produced littleeducational material while paying salaries to a top UM administrator and hisspouse.Barrett, Stearns and UM President George Dennison agreed thatoversight since the INSA incident has been much tighter."There are always exceptions to having everything operate perfectly, but both internal audits and legislative audits help us find problems and fixthem," Stearns said. "All of us regularly account to the regentsdemonstrating progress toward the board's goals of affordability, quality,service to the state and region, and efficiency."Barrett said the INSA incident shouldn’t be used a justification for takingfunds away from students."It's a simplistic excuse to undercut funding," Barrett said. "If there's amanagement problem you fix it. You don't stop funding."But Sinrud isn't the only lawmaker concerned with oversight.Although he voted to put the levy on the ballot, House Speaker ScottSales helped draft the argument against the six-mill levy in the state’sofficial 2008 voters' guide."The university system needs to get back to the basics," the Bozeman-area Republican said. "I think they've lost focus, which is to provide aquality, low-cost education to as many students as possible."Sales said he also worries how the nation’s economic downturn willaffect the money available for higher education."My fear over the next couple of years is that we're going to see asignificant reduction in the money we have for government in general, andthat's going to translate to higher education as well," Sales said. "I don'tthink there'll be a cut, but I don't think the money is going to be there."Sinrud said the system’s costs are rising faster than inflation and thatcan’t continue."I believe education costs can be reduced," Sinrud said. "We need tolook at that."Sinrud said if the state wants to spend more on higher education itshould look not at taxpayers but at developing Montana’s natural resources.